- Banking & Finance
- Employment & Unemployment
- Future of Work
- Gender at Work
- Gig Economy
- Industry & Sector Policies
- Infrastructure & Construction
- Insecure & Precarious Work
- Labour Standards & Workers' Rights
- Population & Migration
- Public Sector, Procurement & Privatisation
- Science & Technology
- Social Security & Welfare
- Tax, Spending & the Budget
- Unions & Collective Bargaining
- Wages & Entitlements
- Young Workers
- Climate & Energy
- Democracy & Accountability
- International & Security Affairs
- Law, Society & Culture
The Australia Institute’s annual Climate of the Nation report provides a comprehensive account of Australian attitudes towards climate change, its causes and impacts, and the integrity of Australia’s current and proposed climate solutions.
uComms conducted a survey of 816 residents across Tasmania on behalf of The Australia Institute during the evening of 4th – 5th April 2023 using self-completed automated voice polling methodologies.
NT water policy changes are aimed at expanding irrigation, particularly cotton production. Government and industry claims that cotton expansion would create significant employment and tax payments are not supported by data. Census figures show that cotton is one of the least jobsintensive sectors in the economy. According to the Australian Tax Office, major cotton companies
uComms conducted a survey of 801 residents in the SA Federal seat of Boothby on behalf of The Australia Institute during the evening of 30 March 2022 using self-completed automated voice polling methodologies.
uComms conducted a survey of 809 residents in the SA Federal seat of Sturt on behalf of The Australia Institute during the evening of 30 March 2022 using self-completed automated voice polling methodologies.
Licencing floodplain harvesting at lawful, sustainable volumes would be a major environmental, social and economic reform for the NSW Murray Darling Basin. There are also major implications for human health, community wellbeing, equity and the state budget. With so much at stake, public and government attention needs to be focused on the work of the
Murray Darling Basin Governments are attempting to recover 450 gigalitres (GL) of water through off-farm water efficiency projects, with almost $1.6 billion in funding, or an average of $3,500 per megalitre. Murrumbidgee Irrigation (MI) has put forward a proposal that would recover 6,282ML at a cost of $124 million. This equates to $19,739 per megalitre
The current level of floodplain harvesting is inconsistent with legislation. Reducing the practice to lawful levels could be done with minimal economic impact due to the export-oriented and capital-intensive nature of cotton production. Even in cotton producing regions, cotton accounts for less than 5% of jobs. Despite a reputation for high profits, major cotton producers
Money originally allocated to ensure a healthy Murray-Darling Basin is now earmarked to be spent on seemingly unrelated infrastructure in New South Wales. Instead of recovering 450GL promised to the environment in downstream states, this money may now flow to a range of questionable projects, including upgrading 1200 bridges in irrigation districts.
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report on strategic water purchases found that the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources’ processes were poor, could not ensure value for money or that conflicts of interest were eliminated. Despite these findings, the audit did not ask if the public actually got value for money and real environmental
Supply measure projects that purport to save water in the Yanco Creek System will lead to environmental damage and “greater diversions” for irrigation in the Murrumbidgee according to water agencies. They are likely to be unlawful, with no way of properly assessing environmental equivalence as defined in the Basin Plan.
Recently released documents show that the vendors in an $80 million water sale had repeatedly offered far lower prices to the Commonwealth but these offers were rejected as ‘not value for money’. The documents mention a company linked to Energy Minister Angus Taylor seven years after it says it ended work with the vendors. The
The Australia Institute welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to the South Australian Select Committee on the findings of the South Australian Murray Darling Basin Royal Commission and the Productivity Commission’s five-year assessment of the Plan. Public commentary frequently blames the Basin Plan for the economic, social and environmental demise of much of the
The Australian National Audit Office is investigating so-called strategic water purchases in the Murray Darling Basin. These purchases were counter to government policy on reducing consumptive use, have not brought balance to the Commonwealth’s water portfolio, were not value for money and did not meet guidelines on transparency, accountability and ethical procurement. The Australia Institute
The Australia Institute made a submission to the Independent Assessment of Social and Economic Conditions in the Murray-Darling Basin. The socio-economic conditions of the Murray Darling Basin share many characteristics with other areas of regional Australia – lower incomes and difficult access to important services. These should be addressed as well as the mismanagement of
The Australia Institute supports the Murray-Darling Basin Commission of Inquiry Bill 2019. This submission considers the implementation of the Basin Plan from a financial auditing perspective.
We thank the Natural Resource Commissioner for the thorough and forthright Draft Review of the Barwon-Darling Water Sharing Plan. We support all of the Commission’s recommendations.We raise two additional matters for the Commission’s consideration: Legality of the 2012 Barwon-Darling Water Sharing Plan Cap compliance
Decisions by the Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) to flood the Barmah-Millewa forest and drain Menindee Lakes have reduced water for NSW Murray general security holders, who have zero allocation for 2018-19. We estimate an allocation of between 16% and 61% could have been possible had MDBA complied with its official Objectives and Outcomes.
The mismanagement of the Murray-Darling Basin has become a national issue in 2019. While the Basin’s problems are widely discussed, solutions are not. Practical steps to turn around the fortunes of the Basin and its people are: Provide emergency relief to the southern Basin dairy industry. Develop a policy framework to ensure diversity in Basin
Analysis of released documents shows that the licences bought by the Commonwealth didn’t exist until the vendors estimated the volumes of the licences themselves, at the suggestion of the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. Due diligence was problematic. At least half of the water purchased cannot count towards water recovery targets as it was
New research from The Australia Institute shows that South Australians overwhelmingly want a Commonwealth Royal Commission into the Murray Darling Basin Plan (73%) and believe that irrigation businesses in the Darling Basin should not be allowed to draw water when mass fish kills and drinking water shortages are occurring downstream (84%).
The rules in place prior to the 2012 Barwon-Darling Water Sharing Plan were based on science and extensive stakeholder consultation. The Water Sharing Plan included changes to those rules that were not based on any science and were not consulted on. The plan was also based on a fundamentally deficient Cap model. The pre-2012 rules
The Australia Institute has made a submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport inquiry into cotton exports. A ban on cotton exports is an ‘unpalatable measure’, but policy change is needed to make the industry transparent, accountable and reduce its impacts on communities and ecosystems elsewhere in the Murray
The Barwon-Darling/Barka River is dry. But almost 2,000 gigalitres have been consumed by the irrigation industry this year while nothing has flowed to Menindee Lakes, the site of the summer fish kills. Despite this, the river actually ‘owes’ water to industry, ‘debts’ it is unlikely to repay due to climate change and policy settings. Please